You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

Why do people complain about running up the score, yet no one bats an eye at the Colts running the ball with 20 seconds left?

Before I say anything else, let me start by saying I've never criticized a team for "running up the score." I don't think there is such a thing. The defense's job is to stop the offense, the offense has no obligation to make it easier on them.

But why would anyone have a problem with a team who is down big, running the ball to end the game rather than risk a pick or wasting very little time on 3 incomplete passes against a team who has already shown they want to score as often as possible?

I don't understand your logic at all.

They could have just kneeled.

Edit: specifically I am talking about the last colts possession. They're down by 4-5 scores with one minute left. Instead of just kneeling they ran the ball. What if Luck or Wayne was hurt on that play in a freak way like Gronk was?_________________

Why do people complain about running up the score, yet no one bats an eye at the Colts running the ball with 20 seconds left?

Before I say anything else, let me start by saying I've never criticized a team for "running up the score." I don't think there is such a thing. The defense's job is to stop the offense, the offense has no obligation to make it easier on them.

But why would anyone have a problem with a team who is down big, running the ball to end the game rather than risk a pick or wasting very little time on 3 incomplete passes against a team who has already shown they want to score as often as possible?

I don't understand your logic at all.

They could have just kneeled.

So you're not interested in having a discussion, thanks for making that clear._________________

This is just another "reason" for people to jump on/criticize the Patriots. He was in there because it's football and you need to have 11 players out there. Period. Belichick said it perfectly today....

"I don't think that's really a good way to approach a team. I've never done that. I don't think that would be a very successful approach to it," said Belichick. "You only have so many players. You only dress so many players. Somebody's got to play. I think you've got to be careful when you're trying to run a team, to go up to one guy and say, 'Michael, we're going to leave you in the game because we care about you, but Glenn, we're going to take you out because you're really important. You other guys go in there because if something happens to you, we don't really care.'

This is just another "reason" for people to jump on/criticize the Patriots. He was in there because it's football and you need to have 11 players out there. Period. Belichick said it perfectly today....

"I don't think that's really a good way to approach a team. I've never done that. I don't think that would be a very successful approach to it," said Belichick. "You only have so many players. You only dress so many players. Somebody's got to play. I think you've got to be careful when you're trying to run a team, to go up to one guy and say, 'Michael, we're going to leave you in the game because we care about you, but Glenn, we're going to take you out because you're really important. You other guys go in there because if something happens to you, we don't really care.'

Good luck running your teams when you make it clear to some players they mean nothing

Yeah players dont know some are more important than others I guess the third string center should go ask for brady money, sense BB makes him feel just as important.

What? If I was on a football team where my head coach said yeah you're not nearly as important as player A and we can't afford to lose him but you? Yeah I dont really care about you, so get out there. I wouldn't have much interest in playing for him. You're blatantly just grasping for anything to hate on right now._________________RTR
#JDI
[quote="GFalcon"]go saints[/quote]
[quote="Texansfan713"]Go Pelicans![/quote]

I'm going to make a thread every time some big mean defense causes a shutout for being a bunch of arrogant bullies and not letting the poor offense score any points.

Why? This thread was created to discuss Gronks injury, not to discuss the ethics of running up the score. You're overreacting in a big way.

I know the thread's purpose, yet on this forum and many other mediums discussing his injury, its alluded to that it is karma for running it up which is the most backwards nonsensical logic I've heard in a while. Gronk is part of the EP unit and could have been in on that play whether the score was 59-24 or 24-20.

bbllstr22 wrote:

Belichick deserved this. He had no business playing starters with a 30 point lead deep in the 4th quarter. Won't hurt too badly but he was destroying Indy. I'm not saying it's a good thing he got injured however, you never want to see a guy get injured.

TommyC376 wrote:

Is this what you get for running up the score?

I didnt see the end of the game so I dont know if they did that or not but by the looks of the score it looks like they did.

But, why was he out there on the final extra point? He is a franchise TE and the best one in the game, they couldnt replace him with a back up?

If you would like the thread to remain strictly news related to the injury instead of a discussion of ethics, we agree. It would be nice if the two above posts could follow that mantra as well.

What? If I was on a football team where my head coach said yeah you're not nearly as important as player A and we can't afford to lose him but you? Yeah I dont really care about you, so get out there. I wouldn't have much interest in playing for him. You're blatantly just grasping for anything to hate on right now.

Guess you've never played football at any level then because the starters are starters for a reason, and backups are backups for a reason. If you're a backup you strive to win the starting position but you accept the fact that the coach believes the guy starting in your position is better and therefore move valuable. You'd be naive to think otherwise.

But anyway, what is the reason most traditional head coaches pull their starters when up big in the 4th quarter if not to avoid injury?

As for the Gronk injury. Bad timing with the Houston and SF games coming up. This could cost the Pats a home playoff game. But if there is a team that can overcome losing such an important player it's the Pats who have proven it before._________________

What? If I was on a football team where my head coach said yeah you're not nearly as important as player A and we can't afford to lose him but you? Yeah I dont really care about you, so get out there. I wouldn't have much interest in playing for him. You're blatantly just grasping for anything to hate on right now.

Guess you've never played football at any level then because the starters are starters for a reason, and backups are backups for a reason. If you're a backup you strive to win the starting position but you accept the fact that the coach believes the guy starting in your position is better and therefore move valuable. You'd be naive to think otherwise.

But anyway, what is the reason most traditional head coaches pull their starters when up big in the 4th quarter if not to avoid injury?

As for the Gronk injury. Bad timing with the Houston and SF games coming up. This could cost the Pats a home playoff game. But if there is a team that can overcome losing such an important player it's the Pats who have proven it before.

Well the Texans are without Cushing for the year and also have Tate out. Not sure about what injuries the 49ers have. I'm not worried about the injury and won't make excuses for it. If we beat or lose to either team its because we're better or worse, not because of injuries._________________

What? If I was on a football team where my head coach said yeah you're not nearly as important as player A and we can't afford to lose him but you? Yeah I dont really care about you, so get out there. I wouldn't have much interest in playing for him. You're blatantly just grasping for anything to hate on right now.

Guess you've never played football at any level then because the starters are starters for a reason, and backups are backups for a reason. If you're a backup you strive to win the starting position but you accept the fact that the coach believes the guy starting in your position is better and therefore move valuable. You'd be naive to think otherwise.

But anyway, what is the reason most traditional head coaches pull their starters when up big in the 4th quarter if not to avoid injury?

As for the Gronk injury. Bad timing with the Houston and SF games coming up. This could cost the Pats a home playoff game. But if there is a team that can overcome losing such an important player it's the Pats who have proven it before.

I played all 4 years in high school. If my coach had an interview after a game and said yeah we put our backups in and pulled our starters because we don't really care if our backups get hurt, I'd be pissed. Bill handled the situation perfectly, you guys are grasping at straws for attacking that interview._________________RTR
#JDI
[quote="GFalcon"]go saints[/quote]
[quote="Texansfan713"]Go Pelicans![/quote]

I played all 4 years in high school. If my coach had an interview after a game and said yeah we put our backups in and pulled our starters because we don't really care if our backups get hurt, I'd be pissed. Bill handled the situation perfectly, you guys are grasping at straws for attacking that interview.

You're spinning it to fit your agenda. No one is saying coaches "don't care" if backups get hurt. But losing a backup to injury as opposed to a starter is much easier to overcome and compensate for. It's the value to the team's ability to win that places more emphasis and value on a starter. Not to mention an elite starter such as Gronk.

You didn't answer the question I posted either. If BB is correct then why do most other traditional coaches pull their starters from the game when winning big late in the 4th?_________________

What? If I was on a football team where my head coach said yeah you're not nearly as important as player A and we can't afford to lose him but you? Yeah I dont really care about you, so get out there. I wouldn't have much interest in playing for him. You're blatantly just grasping for anything to hate on right now.

Guess you've never played football at any level then because the starters are starters for a reason, and backups are backups for a reason. If you're a backup you strive to win the starting position but you accept the fact that the coach believes the guy starting in your position is better and therefore move valuable. You'd be naive to think otherwise.

But anyway, what is the reason most traditional head coaches pull their starters when up big in the 4th quarter if not to avoid injury?

As for the Gronk injury. Bad timing with the Houston and SF games coming up. This could cost the Pats a home playoff game. But if there is a team that can overcome losing such an important player it's the Pats who have proven it before.

I played all 4 years in high school. If my coach had an interview after a game and said yeah we put our backups in and pulled our starters because we don't really care if our backups get hurt, I'd be pissed. Bill handled the situation perfectly, you guys are grasping at straws for attacking that interview.

What if the coach said they pulled the starters to keep them healthy?

Don't let the way you phrase this get in the way of what's really going on._________________

Well the Texans are without Cushing for the year and also have Tate out. Not sure about what injuries the 49ers have. I'm not worried about the injury and won't make excuses for it. If we beat or lose to either team its because we're better or worse, not because of injuries.

Well I agree to a degree. Depth is what determines the good teams from the average. And overcoming injuries is the earmark for good teams. But certain losses are harder to overcome then others. Losing your starting QB for the year is almost always a fatal death blow to most teams. Especially an elite QB. Obviously a starting TE in the traditional sense isn't high on the list of critical players. But for the Pats with Gronk being such a big part of the offense I see it affecting them quite more then a traditional team losing a traditional starting TE. I do think the Pats have more then enough other weapons, and are adaptable to be able to still win without Gronk. But I would say those two games vs. Houston and SF which the Pats probably would have been the favorites in playing at home just got quite a bit closer._________________